Today the only time control we have for corr games is a fixed time of days per move. Beginners tend to forfeit on time with 1 day-per-move games first, then start to choose longer time controls to have their "busy days" in check. However, the game then lasts for months and you need to focus on something else, such as your vacations... :-) Bottom line is that current time control is just not flexible enough.
How about having a 0.5 to 3 day increment per move ? How about traditional time control as stated in Wikipedia?
"Time limits in correspondence play are usually between 30 and 60 days for every 10 moves"
Correspondence is the most flexible time control. Are you honestly suggesting that after every move you get an extra 12 - 72 hours? If you can't commit to the time then choose one you can. You can choose to play one move every 14 days. How long do you take on vacation?
"Time limits in correspondence play are usually between 30 and 60 days for every 10 moves"
Yes, probably because of the time it takes to walk to the post office, buy a stamp, walk back home, think of your move, write down the move, put said move in envelope, lick envelope, walk to a post box, post your move and wait for the postman to deliver it to your opponent for him to repeat the process.
Online correspondence is different to real life.
@NeverBeenTimid , please do your research before assuming the control used in
chess.com (which lichess has copied) has any basis, or even that this is any standard.
And the quote from Wikipedia is not for postal chess. Go check it out and you'll notice extra time would be added if it was about postal chess. For your information, server corr chess exists much before lichess existed and the flexible time control was already used in traditional clubs like ICC and ICCF, which have been running correspondence tournaments since long ago ( likely before you were born ).
This is a discussion from
chess.com were people also wish something more flexible:
www.chess.com/survey/which-is-your-favorite-online-correspondence-chess-time-control @Dopaminergic_Chess An option that is not available, nor do I think is a good idea, is having "vacation time". It simply gets overly abused, disrupting the normal flow of games. Too many players at CC when losing badly, simply take vacation time.
I do not know by what is meant by not "flexible enough. " Anywhere from 1-14 days are options. A half day time control ? Why? 3 day exists. Setting specific # of moves in x amount of days just seems far to burdensome. Even games with 1-2 day are expected to last months. Sure players often make many moves a day, games are over in weeks, but if a player so chooses to take his full time per move, then correspondence does take months.
ICCF plays with vacation and time/move stuff. Give Some money and play REAL correspondence chess.
@mdinnerspace , yes I understand the "x days per y moves" is not very intuitive. But everyone is used to Fischer time "initial x days + y extra days per move". Then people may still play regular 1-day to 14-day fixed time controls, which are the same as having zero increment. How about that ?
ICCF also permits engine use. Not my thing to play em.
@savagechess2k ,
But there is nothing better than lichess interface.
Everyone is going to have a personal preference that suits their particular time schedule. Lichess offers a set of parameters. Making changes, adding this, subtracting that, trying to accommodate everybody is an impossible task. Lichess seems to prefer keeping things basic, the less complicated the easier to manage. Sometimes the simplest is the best. Start making changes (unless they are really good suggestions, possibly something has grown out of date) sets precedence that becomes difficult to maintain. That's just my opinion. No doubt there are many great suggestions that will benefit alot of users, but I can understand developers not jumping in and adding bells and whistles. Such policies brought v3 at CC a great deal of headache, after 3 years they still can't get things right with all the bugs and lag issues. Not to compare the developers here to the bozos at CC ! Changes here seldom result in bug issues. If a minor one pops up, thibault seems to be on it often within the hour.
Can you explain this statement with more details?
"Such policies brought v3 at CC a great deal of headache"